The appellants' properties were damaged by a gas explosion caused by the intentional criminal act (arson) of the defendant David Gordon.
The respondent insurer denied coverage to both David Gordon and his wife, Dora Gordon, under a homeowner's policy exclusion for damage caused by the criminal act of 'any person insured by this policy'.
The appellants opposed the insurer's summary judgment motion to protect their potential rights of recovery.
The Court of Appeal upheld the motions judge's finding that the clear and unambiguous language of the exclusion clause bound the innocent co-insured to the misconduct of her spouse, thereby excluding coverage for both defendants.
